What's worth capturing a city state for?

[Minor Annoyance]

I often forget that CS are viable targets unless an alliance actually puts me at war with one. I was ready to go after one in my current game because their territory got to a natural wonder before I could, but I got distracted by another war and eventually we became allies. The natural probably wasn't worth it unless I was playing as Spain. Much later I took two CS because I was at war with their ally and the CS were closer than the empire's cities. One was maritime and I could have used their ability (lots of cities) but it would have cost a lot to win them over. The second was mercantile so I did get it's special resource. Both were well built up even having science labs which I haven't even researched yet, so especially in the later game they're complete cities.

One of the things tripping me up is I don't know how seriously AI civs take alliances or protection pledges. I seems like someone is always offering protection but I forget that they might not back it up.

I should probably play as Mongolia once to start seeing all CS as targets.

 

[Major_Heartfire]

The diplomatic hit you take from destroying a city state is pretty severe. I wouldn't recommend it under any circumstances.

But, that is just me.

 

[Gilgamesch]

But, that is just me.

Me too, killing a CS, even in war with there allied Civ, will or can trigger big problems. Believe me this will become an evil self runner on higher diffilcuties.

 

[binhthuy71]

Nothing is worth capturing a CS. The hit that you take with the rest of the CS for doing so negates any near term gain.

 

[mintcandy]

I typically don't capture city states for two reasons.

One, if I'm playing aggressive, I already have Problems with happiness, and I don't need more.

Two, capturing city states means that I can't farm them for easy experience.

The one exception I can think of is the Mongolian scenario, because of the harsh time restrictions and because of the sizable rewards for capturing a city state, especially cultural city states. Free policy on capture? YES PLEASE.

 

[Waywocket]

I believe the only time I've taken a city state was when I was playing as Spain and they had the fountain of youth.

 

[smallfish]

When you are short on cash, you don't want a cheesy diplo victory and nobody should have it too.

Otherwise, a variety of reasons relating to "Multiplayer Easy Growth" or need for territorial expansion and road linkups to distant cities of yours.

I recommend conquering city-states, but only if you are sure you can handle the military pressure.

 

[Dactyl]

I have captured CS's that are allied to civs that attack me. However, I liberate them. That gives me such a bump in their opinion of me that they become my allies, and there don't seem to be any diplomatic repercussions.

 

[Halcyan2]

In vanilla, I would occasionally consider attacking a city state for a natural wonder.

In G&K, it is much less of an issue. Even if you are Spain, you are likely better off using Great General Citadels to steal the wonder instead. The only issue is if its GBR, Krakatoa, or maybe Gibraltar, and there's no one to get a citadel next to it.

 

[southpw11]

Me too, killing a CS, even in war with there allied Civ, will or can trigger big problems. Believe me this will become an evil self runner on higher diffilcuties.

Agreed, did this on immortal and it was a mistake.

 

[duxup]

Yeah I hardly ever take a CS. Less and less often as I play.

The rare occasion was a war between myself and a big player on another continent, other player had an allied city state also at war with me in a great strategic decision that I took in order to act as a foot hold on his continent and obtain some important resources.

This was largely the beginning of the endgame so it wan't a long lasting hit and I was willing to take the results.

 

[TandooriChicken]

I do it occasionally as an endgame move in domination games when I no longer care about diplo (edit: when I care even less about diplo than usual). I don't go out of my way to do it, but if they are in the way or offer some strategic advantage, why not?

 

[oPlaiD]

Don't the new mercantile city states at least add a little incentive to conquer some of them? You get a luxury that you can only get through owning that city or conquering it.

Of course, allying it gives you a much bigger bonus than conquering it ever would, so it's kind of silly.

That's one reason I don't understand the Austrian UA - the bonuses the city state gives you for being allied is better than actually owning the city itself in many cases.

 

[The Pilgrim]

Geographical location sometimes. For example, a CS allied with your foe and located on choke point that prevent you from proceeding with your military plans. It's not done by choice, but in such case your options are limited. FoY within CS borders is another good reason. Or when you're so strong and so advanced that you don't care about others. But these situations are rather rare.

Of course, allying it gives you a much bigger bonus than conquering it ever would, so it's kind of silly.

That's one reason I don't understand the Austrian UA - the bonuses the city state gives you for being allied is better than actually owning the city itself in many cases.

Getting a fully developed city with all buildings and good bunch of advanced units for 500 is less beneficial (by much!) than having a few more happy faces? Really?

 

[Callonia]

Really excellent geographical locations that have city states occupying them tend to meet a grisly end to my blades and guns.

There was this one time really early in the game, I saw a City state of Tyre, and I saw his lay of the land, and realized its an fantastic production center for spamming ships, I stormed it in a instant. That was in vanilla. Sea resources and hills. Sorry tyre, get ready to become a citizen or slave of germany empire on how you want to see it xD

 

[Minor Annoyance]

In one game eliminating a player was the end for me because I was universally hated and they all came to kill me almost in unison. I went back 30 turns to do undo it. In another game I eliminated a player and no one cared. Maybe they have to be the absolute most hated empire for it to be safe to kill them.

 

[slobberinbear]

I don't do it often enough, but there are some good times to attack a C-S:

1. You are Attila, Genghis, or another civ with a strong UA or early UU. It is often easier and more profitable to sack a nearby C-S, full of population, buildings, and improved tiles, than it is to settle a new city, and your large army will help keep the AI at bay.
2. The target is "hostile" and/or has an ally benefit you don't want/need.
3. You think Maria is going to buy them (or you are convinced that you will not be able to pry it away from an enemy AI civ), so you take it to deny it to the AI.
4. The target has a resource you need and you don't think you'll be able to consistently maintain the target as an ally.
5. You want to use the target to train your units and/or to gather some free workers.
6. You want to expand but don't want to war with the AI or settle new cities for some reason (e.g., diplomacy, desire to keep getting social policies, etc.)
7. The C-S is blocking a route to an AI civ you intend to attack. This is a fairly common occurrence on regular Pangaea and Continents maps.

 

[trystero49]

It depends on how much of a warmonger you are, and whether or not you are a dominant superpower and someone bought out all the CSs and it close to winning. One game I played on Emperor as Askia, and Greece had at least 300 influence in every CS, not to mention they followed his religion. (I've noticed as Greece that with Patronage Opener + UA + Shared Religion your influence does not decrease at all). So I conquered seven of them. And the best part? Alex didn't even get angry at me.